$18.00
The Hotness
Games|People|Company
The Hotness has gone cold...
GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters: 119.84

7,229 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
45.6% of Goal | left

Support:

Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

SeaFall» Forums » Variants

Subject: Can this game be played Amicably? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Pasquale Cirone
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I was wondering: Can this game be played amicably? I'm not saying in a cooperative manner, but could this game be played with each Principality agreeing to not attack each other ever (although other NPC island nations are fair game)?

I was thinking that this might be a better fit for me and a couple others if this were possible.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ralph H. Anderson
United States
Prospect
Connecticut
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
Pasquale,

One can play most games that have an aggression component amicably; however, the experience will not be the same. I'm not saying it will be a bad experience, just that it will not be the same.

Besides, where else can you obtain such a variety and surplus of valuables than from your "friends"? devil

As an example, I play 2-player Through the Ages with my wife and we remove the war cards when we play. It is also rare for one of us to even use Aggression cards. We enjoy it very much; however, it is not the same experience as when those cards are in and used well. But those experiences I reserve for my long time gaming friends who enjoy this sort of competition and play non-aggressively with my wife, which is more enjoyable for the two of us together.

R.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Of course you can do anything you want, but I think there are probably 1000 other games on BGG that would be a lot more fun than "SeaFall without combat". Probably a quarter of the game involves combat directly, and much of the rest of the game is balanced around the assumption that players will attack opportunistically. So if you don't do any of that you can't really expect the game to work anything like how it was designed.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Also, I'd have to double-check, but I think there might be game rules and components that you can't even unlock ever if you can't attack the other players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thomas Robb
United States
Calais
Maine
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb


I also believe I have read from the designers that "opportunistic" combat, as David has suggested, is a more viable strategy than constant attacking and raiding.
I know there are rules to punish you if you raid continually - both long and short term.

I also agree with David that if you avoid combat almost entirely, this game is probably not for you as 17th century sailing and exploring encourages combative and exploitation type behaviors.





 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
JR Honeycutt
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Of course you can do anything you want, but I think there are probably 1000 other games on BGG that would be a lot more fun than "SeaFall without combat". Probably a quarter of the game involves combat directly, and much of the rest of the game is balanced around the assumption that players will attack opportunistically. So if you don't do any of that you can't really expect the game to work anything like how it was designed.


This is well-said.

It's definitely possible to play this game without ever interfering with each other, but, unless you agree specifically that "this is literally not a part of our rules set" then there will be moments when it's very, very obvious that the best thing to do is attack each other.

For instance, say you have 50 gold in your treasury and I need gold, and you're not particularly well-defended. I could not attack you, but in doing some I'm directly facilitating your game.

The game is designed so that at times it's best for you to be friendly and at times it's best for you to raid each other.

I've been playing through the campaign, and it's funny - after a year of not playing, I'd forgetting how much the threat of combat colors every game I play. In this way it's very muck like how my groups treat Scythe - I make ever decision under pressure, knowing that if I overextend myself I'll get punished for it. And I love this experience.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Becq Starforged
United States
Cerritos
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Also, I'd have to double-check, but I think there might be game rules and components that you can't even unlock ever if you can't attack the other players.

If that's the only limitation, it's easy to get around. Just make a house policy (not really a house rule, as such) that says that if a milestone of that sort is ever revealed, the player with the lowest title will raid (as painlessly as possible) the player with the highest title (ie, lowest gets credit for the milestone), then the higher title will respond in kind the following year (to "even" the scores and wipe out the enmity). For example, early in the campaign, raiding fields might be the most painless option.

But realistically, I'm not sure how good a game PeaceFall would be. I think that at the very least, the *possibility* of raiding is important -- ie, knowing that you *might* be attacked, even if actual attacks are few and far between. If you and your opponent both desperately need that last goods cube, "first come first served" seems less satisfying that "we'll see who ends up making it back to port with the goods". (And it seems highly likely that bigger stakes than goods cubes will present themselves later in the campaign.)

And as Thomas indicated, the game is designed -- early in the campaign, at least -- to encourage *occasional* opportunistic raiding rather than constant warfare. So even if you play the game as designed, a group of peaceful players may well result in a campaign with a light emphasis on raiding.

Edit: Aaaand ninja'd by a designer. What he said.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Becq wrote:
If that's the only limitation, it's easy to get around. Just make a house policy (not really a house rule, as such) that says that if a milestone of that sort is ever revealed, the player with the lowest title will raid (as painlessly as possible) the player with the highest title (ie, lowest gets credit for the milestone), then the higher title will respond in kind the following year (to "even" the scores and wipe out the enmity). For example, early in the campaign, raiding fields might be the most painless option.


I've never seen such enthusiasm for redesigning a game from someone who hasn't played it or read the rules yet. I admire your energy! Really!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Becq Starforged
United States
Cerritos
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Becq wrote:
If that's the only limitation, it's easy to get around. Just make a house policy (not really a house rule, as such) that says that if a milestone of that sort is ever revealed, the player with the lowest title will raid (as painlessly as possible) the player with the highest title (ie, lowest gets credit for the milestone), then the higher title will respond in kind the following year (to "even" the scores and wipe out the enmity). For example, early in the campaign, raiding fields might be the most painless option.


I've never seen such enthusiasm for redesigning a game from someone who hasn't played it or read the rules yet. I admire your energy! Really!

Did you read the next paragraph?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Becq wrote:
Did you read the next paragraph?


Sure. I read all of what you write. But it's kind of like reading a disquisition on the proper techniques for sailing across the Pacific from someone who lives in a desert and has never been to the ocean.

I find it charming. But odd.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Stack
msg tools
mb
Currently in our 5 player game, we have played 8 games. 2 of the players occasionally raid sites a few times each game (one originally started off aggressive against other players in the first game or two, but that ended mostly when a new player took over that province), I occasionally raid a site when I want an upgrade and raid players about once every 1-3 games when it is strategically necessary, and two players have never once raided (sites or players) the entire campaign.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charlie Roselius
United States
Santa Monica
California
flag msg tools
Tim, how would you say those differing strategies are playing out at your table in terms of whatever metrics of success there are (most wins, most glory, most ???)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Jozrael wrote:
Tim, how would you say those differing strategies are playing out at your table in terms of whatever metrics of success there are (most wins, most glory, most ???)


I hope no one would answer such questions except in spoilers. From what I've seen so far, knowing such things in advance could significantly change how people play.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.